& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Losing a Philosophy over Hartal

by A Maher
***Hartals on the streets are now almost a mere notion with frustrated people eyeing it as a repressive act rather than one of objection, their look is one of contempt. Even opposition politicians are fatigued over contemplating the outcome of a closure, they are secretly unsure of the ideals this time around.***
AS Bangladesh lives through the turmoil of a dangerous birth in democracy it has in a short infancy of ten years, developed volatile tantrums to nurture such a concept. One democratic norm coming out from this exercise in administration is the acknowledgement that one has the right to protest against all unfavourable decisions in national life. The introduction of hartals (defined as public strikes, closures or with stronger tinges of human empathy) seemed to be effective in pushing home the point. It came about as a tool of strength; but before that it grew its roots as a symbol of the underlying thrust for togetherness of the Bengali psyche.
Culturally, this nations populace has a tendency to clutter about randomly converging in a group to take some decision. Both democracy-styled governments used the hartal while in opposition with the autocratic one also opting to remould Its ideals to accommodate such a tool. So it has become somewhat of a philosophy tn the political contour. As far as healthy fathoming of our politicians' thinking goes, it was seen that the people readily accepted hartals to make their voice heard in the face of unjust
measures on them by the party in power. Every hartal had some common traits. The opposition calling the hartal would make It known to all that it was a movement called for 'by the people’. The aftermath of the hartal would also be reviewed with a similar people-oriented reaction - a 'successful' one was because of the people (the opposition) and an unsuccessful one also because the people had rejected it (the Government).
During BNP's rule as the first democratically elected government, hartals had this sort of sentiment which in a way reflected some degree of accomplishment In the practice of the political sport. Some people followed it. believing in the ideals being fought for while others shunned It completely. Ignoring it outright. So democracy was seemingly practised. But of late It Is noticeable that, to devout arbitrators hartals have lost their morals. It is hesitantly and hurriedly called, the supporters are not prepared Just like those who oppose Hartals on the streets are now almost a mere notion with frustrated people eyeing it as a repressive act rather than one of objection, their look is one of contempt. Even opposition
politicians are fatigued over contemplating the outcome of a closure, they are secretly unsure of the ideals this time around. Movements of this class originate from the influence of aired or discreet interventions of those who are morally, ethically and judgementally sound, leading the nation without a portfolio Can we question the sanctity of our overall leadership. oppositions and governments? Can we question of reaping the rewards of the current boom since we might not be. in the next two to three generations?
One interesting question that comes to mind is why Bengalis are so Incited by the Idea of confrontation. When defensiveness means leaning on the shoulders of a very sound judging and evaluating system, the beneficiaries of our agrarian economy are in a fix. But since this has come down the times we find confrontation very visually satisfying with oozing results. So when we lose even the art of controlling confrontational media, we are there to he led by the scruffs of our necks in front of the naked global community. And now we nave gone bad In that department too.
Two complimenting types of effects of a confrontational at-
titude can be discerned. One Is an interesting psychological approach incorporating the scientific principle of sensory adaptation. This is where the mental senses of the public are so constantly exposed to the prospects of hartals that they become immune to it. Also, take the overall effect of hartal on both sides. In the same viewpoint. and a little murkily, there is no result due to both the political sides being too used to the practice to avail of any results. Another perspective suspects the state of the leaders to be similar to those atheists who, in a normal society (in the most neutral form of the word), may not be looked upon to shape social constitutions.
What this implies Is not reprieve to the public, with regard to hartals, because of exhausted lawmakers, but the alarming fact Is that we have at last reached a point where the right to exercise cognition by our leaders are questioned. Both the battle-weary sides are now unfit to bark of Ideals and ethics, when they have plunged themselves to depths forbidding practice of philosophy. When a nation is led by such stalwarts it is a fearful to visualise the consequences that may trickle down and drown the people.